You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to soap-dev@xml.apache.org by Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org> on 2002/12/03 01:41:35 UTC
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Ted Leung wrote:
>
> 4. Some option that hasn't been thought of yet.
Based initially on the reorg discussions, and then a number of F2F
discussions at ApacheCon, I am planning on proposing something radical
within Jakarta, but it applies equally well here. I provided some
foreshadowing for this proposal in an e-mail to community@apache.org,
with the subject of "Convergence, vetoes, forks, and projects".
Specifically, I said:
> Separate code bases with separate communities should be separate
> projects. Independent of the size of the codebase, if the size of
> the community is only a few people, then it is not an ASF project.
> Such efforts can be pursued outside of the ASF, be pursued inside the
> Incubator, or be incorporated inside an existing community – as long
> as all participants in that larger community are treated as peers.
With respect to XML, I honestly don't know how many communities we have.
But the above provides a recipe to find out. Without changing any
physical layout of mailing lists or cvs repositories, we can begin to
phase out the karma and voting boundaries between various subprojects.
Those that don't wish to participate will be encouraged to form their
own separate projects (or move into incubation).
What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
What do others think?
- Sam Ruby
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@xml.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@xml.apache.org>
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Ryan Hoegg <rh...@isisnetworks.net>.
Hi, I didn't reply to the whole list of lists to which this was posted,
but I wanted to see if anyone in the XML-RPC project has a better angle
on this than I do.
What does this all mean in English? This seems to be the tail end of a
long thread from some other list. How is this going to affect the
XML-RPC project?
For example, I would be alarmed to see XML-RPC, Axis, and XML-Security
all get a mandate to become one project or leave Apache.
--
Ryan Hoegg
ISIS Networks
http://www.isisnetworks.net
Sam Ruby wrote:
> > Separate code bases with separate communities should be separate
> > projects. Independent of the size of the codebase, if the size of
> > the community is only a few people, then it is not an ASF project.
> > Such efforts can be pursued outside of the ASF, be pursued inside the
> > Incubator, or be incorporated inside an existing community – as long
> > as all participants in that larger community are treated as peers.
>
> With respect to XML, I honestly don't know how many communities we
> have. But the above provides a recipe to find out. Without changing
> any physical layout of mailing lists or cvs repositories, we can begin
> to phase out the karma and voting boundaries between various
> subprojects. Those that don't wish to participate will be encouraged
> to form their own separate projects (or move into incubation).
>
> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
>
> What do others think?
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Ted Leung <tw...@sauria.com>.
My preference would be that we have a single brand. Apache.
At the moment organizational structure of the foundation is reflected in
the dns's and the project names. I think it would be better to separate
these two issues.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>
To: <ge...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 10:45 AM
Subject: Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
> >
> > Not to pollute the discussion too much, but I just recently became a
> > part of one xml.apache.org project, and have been a member of the
> > Apache community only about 6 months. Before I got involved, though,
> > I was using both Jakarta and xml.apache.org software for quite a
> > while. To me the xml.apache.org brand was always a "subsidiary brand"
> > of ASF, as was Jakarta. It carries enough weight that I have looked
> > here first when I need a piece of software for a project, and will try
> > an Apache project out before a random Sourceforge one every time.
>
>
> Where I work, Apache is a web server. Jakarta IS Java (or alternatively
> its where you get struts and tomcat). XML.apache.org is where Xerces is
> hidden.
>
> -Andy
>
> >
> > $0.02
> > --
> > Ryan Hoegg
> > ISIS Networks
> > http://www.isisnetworks.net
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> > For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
>
> Not to pollute the discussion too much, but I just recently became a
> part of one xml.apache.org project, and have been a member of the
> Apache community only about 6 months. Before I got involved, though,
> I was using both Jakarta and xml.apache.org software for quite a
> while. To me the xml.apache.org brand was always a "subsidiary brand"
> of ASF, as was Jakarta. It carries enough weight that I have looked
> here first when I need a piece of software for a project, and will try
> an Apache project out before a random Sourceforge one every time.
Where I work, Apache is a web server. Jakarta IS Java (or alternatively
its where you get struts and tomcat). XML.apache.org is where Xerces is
hidden.
-Andy
>
> $0.02
> --
> Ryan Hoegg
> ISIS Networks
> http://www.isisnetworks.net
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Ryan Hoegg <rh...@isisnetworks.net>.
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
>> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
>>
>> What do others think?
>
> It continues to sound reasonable to me, but I'd personally like to see
> the Jakarta "brand" continue. Not sure how to *do* that... I don't
> think the same applies to XML. Note that I asked like the tapestry
> guys "want to be top level" and it was "well no one will
> find us there, we want Jakarta"... They're probably right quite
> honestly. Half the people I know barely know there is an
> XML.apache.org...
>
> -Andy
Not to pollute the discussion too much, but I just recently became a
part of one xml.apache.org project, and have been a member of the Apache
community only about 6 months. Before I got involved, though, I was
using both Jakarta and xml.apache.org software for quite a while. To me
the xml.apache.org brand was always a "subsidiary brand" of ASF, as was
Jakarta. It carries enough weight that I have looked here first when I
need a piece of software for a project, and will try an Apache project
out before a random Sourceforge one every time.
$0.02
--
Ryan Hoegg
ISIS Networks
http://www.isisnetworks.net
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Ryan Hoegg <rh...@isisnetworks.net>.
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
>> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
>>
>> What do others think?
>
> It continues to sound reasonable to me, but I'd personally like to see
> the Jakarta "brand" continue. Not sure how to *do* that... I don't
> think the same applies to XML. Note that I asked like the tapestry
> guys "want to be top level" and it was "well no one will
> find us there, we want Jakarta"... They're probably right quite
> honestly. Half the people I know barely know there is an
> XML.apache.org...
>
> -Andy
Not to pollute the discussion too much, but I just recently became a
part of one xml.apache.org project, and have been a member of the Apache
community only about 6 months. Before I got involved, though, I was
using both Jakarta and xml.apache.org software for quite a while. To me
the xml.apache.org brand was always a "subsidiary brand" of ASF, as was
Jakarta. It carries enough weight that I have looked here first when I
need a piece of software for a project, and will try an Apache project
out before a random Sourceforge one every time.
$0.02
--
Ryan Hoegg
ISIS Networks
http://www.isisnetworks.net
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Ryan Hoegg <rh...@isisnetworks.net>.
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
>> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
>>
>> What do others think?
>
> It continues to sound reasonable to me, but I'd personally like to see
> the Jakarta "brand" continue. Not sure how to *do* that... I don't
> think the same applies to XML. Note that I asked like the tapestry
> guys "want to be top level" and it was "well no one will
> find us there, we want Jakarta"... They're probably right quite
> honestly. Half the people I know barely know there is an
> XML.apache.org...
>
> -Andy
Not to pollute the discussion too much, but I just recently became a
part of one xml.apache.org project, and have been a member of the Apache
community only about 6 months. Before I got involved, though, I was
using both Jakarta and xml.apache.org software for quite a while. To me
the xml.apache.org brand was always a "subsidiary brand" of ASF, as was
Jakarta. It carries enough weight that I have looked here first when I
need a piece of software for a project, and will try an Apache project
out before a random Sourceforge one every time.
$0.02
--
Ryan Hoegg
ISIS Networks
http://www.isisnetworks.net
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@xml.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@xml.apache.org>
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Ryan Hoegg <rh...@isisnetworks.net>.
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
>> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
>>
>> What do others think?
>
> It continues to sound reasonable to me, but I'd personally like to see
> the Jakarta "brand" continue. Not sure how to *do* that... I don't
> think the same applies to XML. Note that I asked like the tapestry
> guys "want to be top level" and it was "well no one will
> find us there, we want Jakarta"... They're probably right quite
> honestly. Half the people I know barely know there is an
> XML.apache.org...
>
> -Andy
Not to pollute the discussion too much, but I just recently became a
part of one xml.apache.org project, and have been a member of the Apache
community only about 6 months. Before I got involved, though, I was
using both Jakarta and xml.apache.org software for quite a while. To me
the xml.apache.org brand was always a "subsidiary brand" of ASF, as was
Jakarta. It carries enough weight that I have looked here first when I
need a piece of software for a project, and will try an Apache project
out before a random Sourceforge one every time.
$0.02
--
Ryan Hoegg
ISIS Networks
http://www.isisnetworks.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: xerces-p-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: xerces-p-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Ryan Hoegg <rh...@isisnetworks.net>.
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
>> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
>>
>> What do others think?
>
> It continues to sound reasonable to me, but I'd personally like to see
> the Jakarta "brand" continue. Not sure how to *do* that... I don't
> think the same applies to XML. Note that I asked like the tapestry
> guys "want to be top level" and it was "well no one will
> find us there, we want Jakarta"... They're probably right quite
> honestly. Half the people I know barely know there is an
> XML.apache.org...
>
> -Andy
Not to pollute the discussion too much, but I just recently became a
part of one xml.apache.org project, and have been a member of the Apache
community only about 6 months. Before I got involved, though, I was
using both Jakarta and xml.apache.org software for quite a while. To me
the xml.apache.org brand was always a "subsidiary brand" of ASF, as was
Jakarta. It carries enough weight that I have looked here first when I
need a piece of software for a project, and will try an Apache project
out before a random Sourceforge one every time.
$0.02
--
Ryan Hoegg
ISIS Networks
http://www.isisnetworks.net
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Ryan Hoegg <rh...@isisnetworks.net>.
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
>> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
>>
>> What do others think?
>
> It continues to sound reasonable to me, but I'd personally like to see
> the Jakarta "brand" continue. Not sure how to *do* that... I don't
> think the same applies to XML. Note that I asked like the tapestry
> guys "want to be top level" and it was "well no one will
> find us there, we want Jakarta"... They're probably right quite
> honestly. Half the people I know barely know there is an
> XML.apache.org...
>
> -Andy
Not to pollute the discussion too much, but I just recently became a
part of one xml.apache.org project, and have been a member of the Apache
community only about 6 months. Before I got involved, though, I was
using both Jakarta and xml.apache.org software for quite a while. To me
the xml.apache.org brand was always a "subsidiary brand" of ASF, as was
Jakarta. It carries enough weight that I have looked here first when I
need a piece of software for a project, and will try an Apache project
out before a random Sourceforge one every time.
$0.02
--
Ryan Hoegg
ISIS Networks
http://www.isisnetworks.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Ryan Hoegg <rh...@isisnetworks.net>.
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
>> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
>> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
>>
>> What do others think?
>
> It continues to sound reasonable to me, but I'd personally like to see
> the Jakarta "brand" continue. Not sure how to *do* that... I don't
> think the same applies to XML. Note that I asked like the tapestry
> guys "want to be top level" and it was "well no one will
> find us there, we want Jakarta"... They're probably right quite
> honestly. Half the people I know barely know there is an
> XML.apache.org...
>
> -Andy
Not to pollute the discussion too much, but I just recently became a
part of one xml.apache.org project, and have been a member of the Apache
community only about 6 months. Before I got involved, though, I was
using both Jakarta and xml.apache.org software for quite a while. To me
the xml.apache.org brand was always a "subsidiary brand" of ASF, as was
Jakarta. It carries enough weight that I have looked here first when I
need a piece of software for a project, and will try an Apache project
out before a random Sourceforge one every time.
$0.02
--
Ryan Hoegg
ISIS Networks
http://www.isisnetworks.net
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
>
> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
>
> What do others think?
It continues to sound reasonable to me, but I'd personally like to see
the Jakarta "brand" continue. Not sure how to *do* that...
I don't think the same applies to XML. Note that I asked like the
tapestry guys "want to be top level" and it was "well no one will
find us there, we want Jakarta"... They're probably right quite
honestly. Half the people I know barely know there is an XML.apache.org...
-Andy
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
>
>
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Ted Leung <tw...@sauria.com>.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nicola Ken Barozzi" <ni...@apache.org>
To: <ge...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 2:34 AM
Subject: Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
>
>
> Steven Noels wrote:
> > Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> >
> >> Steven Noels wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Less structure, more responsibility.
> >
> >
> > ACK
> >
> >>> Also, I don't know whether this approach will help smaller
> >>> communities to mix & merge: they'll get lost without some proper
> >>> identity. Do we want incubator or commons to contain that many
> >>> projects? How many people will still have the overview?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Apart from having all commit privileges to all jakarta projects, I
> >> don't see why this will necessarily change communities. They don't
> >> have to mix and merge, they are simply becoming aware that they are
> >> part of Jakarta, or have to go top-level.
> >>
> >> Increasing awareness of what Jakarta and Xml.Apache really are -
> >> projects - instead of pretending they are smaller Apaches.
> >
> >
> > Point taken & agree.
> >
> > Getting back to the original question however, it felt like Ted (as XML
> > PMC member) came to ask us what this XML project needs to be, i.e. what
> > the XML PMC should take care off. If everyone leaves and becomes a
> > toplevel project (which I don't believe will happen), what will happen
> > to the XML project then?
>
> If (as you believe will not happen) not all projects become top-level,
> there is no problem.
> If all go top-level, they will be happy of it, since they are not
> obliged to do it, so itìs still not a problem.
>
> Bottom line: tell everyone what should be done, ie top-level or in the
> same xml project.
>
> If something is needed, it will naturally remain.
> If it's not it will naturally go away.
I am not trying to tell anyone or any project what to do. I am trying to
help the
xml.apache.org community understand some issues which I did not understand
that well myself until recently. I haven't come to a conclusive opinion
on what
should be done. Sam and I talked at ApacheCon, and at the point where that
discussion occurred, I was feeling very much that we ought to push the xml
subprojects to become top level projects. A few days later I had lunch with
Dirk, and he pointed out that top-leveling all the projects is not a panacea
for
some of the issues in some of the projects, and so my enthusiasm for
top-leveling
has cooled somewhat. My opinions on this are evolving. My hope is that as
we
discuss, people will be able to determine the merits of the various
solutions for
the projects that they are involved with, and take appropriate action.
Ted
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Steven Noels wrote:
> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
>> Steven Noels wrote:
>
>
>> Less structure, more responsibility.
>
>
> ACK
>
>>> Also, I don't know whether this approach will help smaller
>>> communities to mix & merge: they'll get lost without some proper
>>> identity. Do we want incubator or commons to contain that many
>>> projects? How many people will still have the overview?
>>
>>
>>
>> Apart from having all commit privileges to all jakarta projects, I
>> don't see why this will necessarily change communities. They don't
>> have to mix and merge, they are simply becoming aware that they are
>> part of Jakarta, or have to go top-level.
>>
>> Increasing awareness of what Jakarta and Xml.Apache really are -
>> projects - instead of pretending they are smaller Apaches.
>
>
> Point taken & agree.
>
> Getting back to the original question however, it felt like Ted (as XML
> PMC member) came to ask us what this XML project needs to be, i.e. what
> the XML PMC should take care off. If everyone leaves and becomes a
> toplevel project (which I don't believe will happen), what will happen
> to the XML project then?
If (as you believe will not happen) not all projects become top-level,
there is no problem.
If all go top-level, they will be happy of it, since they are not
obliged to do it, so itìs still not a problem.
Bottom line: tell everyone what should be done, ie top-level or in the
same xml project.
If something is needed, it will naturally remain.
If it's not it will naturally go away.
-> No problem :-)
> I'll think some more about that.
>
> </Steven>
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Andy Clark <an...@apache.org>.
Steven Noels wrote:
> If everyone leaves and becomes a toplevel project (which
> I don't believe will happen), what will happen to the
> XML project then?
I think too much effort is being expended trying to
decide between everything being a top-level project
or kept within a project group (e.g. XML, Jakarta).
And the problem is intensified by the fact that
there are projects that cross boundaries. So why
have these boundaries at all?
Instead of thinking of where each project feels
comfortable developing, we should be thinking about
how users find the projects and solutions that they
need. Users, especially new ones, don't approach
Apache thinking that they need Tomcat and Cocoon;
they are looking for a server application that lets
them dynamically generate web pages using XML.
So I say make every project independent (unless
there is a direct, mandatory dependency -- i.e. a
sub-project) and then allow each project to decide
which taxonomy (or taxonomies) that are appropriate.
--
Andy Clark * andyc@apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> Steven Noels wrote:
> Less structure, more responsibility.
ACK
>> Also, I don't know whether this approach will help smaller communities
>> to mix & merge: they'll get lost without some proper identity. Do we
>> want incubator or commons to contain that many projects? How many
>> people will still have the overview?
>
>
> Apart from having all commit privileges to all jakarta projects, I don't
> see why this will necessarily change communities. They don't have to mix
> and merge, they are simply becoming aware that they are part of Jakarta,
> or have to go top-level.
>
> Increasing awareness of what Jakarta and Xml.Apache really are -
> projects - instead of pretending they are smaller Apaches.
Point taken & agree.
Getting back to the original question however, it felt like Ted (as XML
PMC member) came to ask us what this XML project needs to be, i.e. what
the XML PMC should take care off. If everyone leaves and becomes a
toplevel project (which I don't believe will happen), what will happen
to the XML project then?
I'll think some more about that.
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://radio.weblogs.com/0103539/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Steven Noels wrote:
> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>
>>> I understand your point that a single PMC overlooking a lot of
>>> scattered projects doesn't scale. Still, I believe some of these
>>> smallish subprojects can share a common spirit, without sharing the
>>> developers community. Merging all of these will make them less
>>> visible to the outside world IMHO - meaning developers can meet,
>>> merge or exchange, but to prospective users it will all be one big
>>> sinkhole.
>>
>>
>>
>> IIUC this is to gently nudge them to go top-level with their own PMC.
>> If they want visibility, they need take also the responsibilities.
>
>
> I agree this is a good solution for the large projects with an active
> community (e.g. Cocoon in the xml.a.o case). Still, I'm not sure whether
> the board needs this avalanche of toplevel projects, all required to
> post their STATUS once in a while, all present upon meetings, etc etc...
> we'll just move the scalability problem one level up, I fear.
No, we are putting *responsibility* where it belongs.
Top level projects have a chair who is legally representative of Apache,
and should manage themselves. Having the whole Jakarta PMC manage them
is too much. What we want to do is not to shift the management to the
board, but to maki it go to the projects.
Less structure, more responsibility.
> Also, I don't know whether this approach will help smaller communities
> to mix & merge: they'll get lost without some proper identity. Do we
> want incubator or commons to contain that many projects? How many people
> will still have the overview?
Apart from having all commit privileges to all jakarta projects, I don't
see why this will necessarily change communities. They don't have to mix
and merge, they are simply becoming aware that they are part of Jakarta,
or have to go top-level.
Increasing awareness of what Jakarta and Xml.Apache really are -
projects - instead of pretending they are smaller Apaches.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Dirk-Willem van Gulik wrote:
> to mix & merge: they'll get lost without some proper identity. Do we
> want incubator or commons to contain that many projects? How many people
> will still have the overview?
>
> Or when they all become top level projects with no management
> container/grouping/clustinger - can the board maintain overview ?
If the projects are able to maintain themselves IMHO yes, as it is in my
company organization.
I am the project manager here and have weekly meetings with 12 people,
all from different work units; if they do their job well and just need
to report, the meeting takes no more than 20 minutes. If they "whine"
(yes, it happens ;-) then it can take more than the whole morning.
The board can always find a pattern in the problems and requests it
recieves, and create groups that address these issues for them, like the
infrastructure group or the incubator project.
Grouping IMHO makes sense, but not really from a management perspective,
since projects can be part of many groups (ie cocoon=java+xml+...).
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Dirk-Willem van Gulik <di...@webweaving.org>.
> to mix & merge: they'll get lost without some proper identity. Do we
> want incubator or commons to contain that many projects? How many people
> will still have the overview?
Or when they all become top level projects with no management
container/grouping/clustinger - can the board maintain overview ?
Dw
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
>> I understand your point that a single PMC overlooking a lot of
>> scattered projects doesn't scale. Still, I believe some of these
>> smallish subprojects can share a common spirit, without sharing the
>> developers community. Merging all of these will make them less visible
>> to the outside world IMHO - meaning developers can meet, merge or
>> exchange, but to prospective users it will all be one big sinkhole.
>
>
> IIUC this is to gently nudge them to go top-level with their own PMC.
> If they want visibility, they need take also the responsibilities.
I agree this is a good solution for the large projects with an active
community (e.g. Cocoon in the xml.a.o case). Still, I'm not sure whether
the board needs this avalanche of toplevel projects, all required to
post their STATUS once in a while, all present upon meetings, etc etc...
we'll just move the scalability problem one level up, I fear.
Also, I don't know whether this approach will help smaller communities
to mix & merge: they'll get lost without some proper identity. Do we
want incubator or commons to contain that many projects? How many people
will still have the overview?
</Steven>
http://radio.weblogs.com/0103539/2002/12/03.html#a80 ;-)
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://radio.weblogs.com/0103539/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ni...@apache.org>.
Steven Noels wrote:
> Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>> Merge or diverge. Having community boundaries distinct from PMC
>> boundaries is not sustainable.
>
>
> And what about Commons and Commons-Sandbox? One can imagine these as the
> refugee camps for smallish subprojects, without the 'community' to go
> toplevel.
>
> http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/jakarta-commons/
> http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/jakarta-commons-sandbox/
>
> might contain a lot of subprojects which doesn't fit your criteria
> sizewise. Should these all be put back to incubator stage? Or do they
> share a common 'Commons' community?
>
> I understand your point that a single PMC overlooking a lot of scattered
> projects doesn't scale. Still, I believe some of these smallish
> subprojects can share a common spirit, without sharing the developers
> community. Merging all of these will make them less visible to the
> outside world IMHO - meaning developers can meet, merge or exchange, but
> to prospective users it will all be one big sinkhole.
IIUC this is to gently nudge them to go top-level with their own PMC.
If they want visibility, they need take also the responsibilities.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi nicolaken@apache.org
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Ted Leung <tw...@sauria.com>.
One way of looking at Jakarta Commons Sandbox is as a kind of incubator. So
you
could argue that those projects should move to incubation...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steven Noels" <st...@outerthought.org>
To: <ge...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 12:45 AM
Subject: Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
> Sam Ruby wrote:
>
> > Merge or diverge. Having community boundaries distinct from PMC
> > boundaries is not sustainable.
>
> And what about Commons and Commons-Sandbox? One can imagine these as the
> refugee camps for smallish subprojects, without the 'community' to go
> toplevel.
>
> http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/jakarta-commons/
> http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/jakarta-commons-sandbox/
>
> might contain a lot of subprojects which doesn't fit your criteria
> sizewise. Should these all be put back to incubator stage? Or do they
> share a common 'Commons' community?
>
> I understand your point that a single PMC overlooking a lot of scattered
> projects doesn't scale. Still, I believe some of these smallish
> subprojects can share a common spirit, without sharing the developers
> community. Merging all of these will make them less visible to the
> outside world IMHO - meaning developers can meet, merge or exchange, but
> to prospective users it will all be one big sinkhole.
>
> </Steven>
> --
> Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
> Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
> Read my weblog at http://radio.weblogs.com/0103539/
> stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
Sam Ruby wrote:
> Merge or diverge. Having community boundaries distinct from PMC
> boundaries is not sustainable.
And what about Commons and Commons-Sandbox? One can imagine these as the
refugee camps for smallish subprojects, without the 'community' to go
toplevel.
http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/jakarta-commons/
http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/jakarta-commons-sandbox/
might contain a lot of subprojects which doesn't fit your criteria
sizewise. Should these all be put back to incubator stage? Or do they
share a common 'Commons' community?
I understand your point that a single PMC overlooking a lot of scattered
projects doesn't scale. Still, I believe some of these smallish
subprojects can share a common spirit, without sharing the developers
community. Merging all of these will make them less visible to the
outside world IMHO - meaning developers can meet, merge or exchange, but
to prospective users it will all be one big sinkhole.
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://radio.weblogs.com/0103539/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Ted Leung <tw...@sauria.com>.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Ruby" <ru...@apache.org>
To: <ge...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 5:40 PM
Subject: Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
> Steven Noels wrote:
> > [suggestion to hold this discussion only on general@xml.a.o from now?]
>
> > bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep fop
> >
avail|coar,dirkx,stefano,twl,andyh,sboag,jtauber,andyc,rpfeiffe,mpogue,mdier
ken,kvisco,eduardop,abagchi,rahulj,rwebster,roddey,dleslie,mmidy,sanjiva,dma
rston,pauldick,curcuru,dbertoni,jdonohue,robweir,balld,ricardo,zvia,gmarcy,a
rkin,duncan,aruna1,rajiv,fotis,eschaeffer,arved,gears,jordan,keiron,stanisla
v,klease,kellyc,artw,tore,bdelacretaz,chrisg,pbwest,pietsch,jeremias,olegt,v
mote|xml-fop,xml-site,xml-commons
> >
> > bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep xang
> >
avail|coar,dirkx,mode,stefano,twl,andyh,sboag,jtauber,andyc,rpfeiffe,mpogue,
mdierken,kvisco,eduardop,abagchi,rahulj,rwebster,roddey,dleslie,mmidy,sanjiv
a,dmarston,pauldick,curcuru,dbertoni,jdonohue,robweir,balld,ricardo,zvia,gma
rcy,arkin,duncan,aruna1,rajiv,lehors,jeffreyr,rubys,ben,hbed,duftler,jkessel
m,auriemma,jacek,martinf,costin,garyp,johng,tmiller,amiro,morten,ovidiu,jamb
roziak,santiagopg,ilene,zongaro,mkwan|xml-site,xml-xalan,xml-stylebook,xml-x
ang,xml-admin,xml-commons
> >
> > From the result of this, one could possibly say FOP has less community
> > then Xang, but we all knew the opposite is quite true.
>
> If taken literally, my read of this is that they are essentially the
> same community.
>
The answer here is that when xml.apache.org was formed, all the committers
of the original projects were given commit access on all the projects.
It may not have been the right thing to do, but that's the historical
explanation for the avail entries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org>.
Steven Noels wrote:
> [suggestion to hold this discussion only on general@xml.a.o from now?]
>
>> > Separate code bases with separate communities should be separate
>> > projects. Independent of the size of the codebase, if the size of
>> > the community is only a few people, then it is not an ASF project.
>> > Such efforts can be pursued outside of the ASF, be pursued inside the
>> > Incubator, or be incorporated inside an existing community – as long
>> > as all participants in that larger community are treated as peers.
>
> Please define 'a few':
Some undefined number above three. Undefined only because it is a
judgment call.
> bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep fop
> avail|coar,dirkx,stefano,twl,andyh,sboag,jtauber,andyc,rpfeiffe,mpogue,mdierken,kvisco,eduardop,abagchi,rahulj,rwebster,roddey,dleslie,mmidy,sanjiva,dmarston,pauldick,curcuru,dbertoni,jdonohue,robweir,balld,ricardo,zvia,gmarcy,arkin,duncan,aruna1,rajiv,fotis,eschaeffer,arved,gears,jordan,keiron,stanislav,klease,kellyc,artw,tore,bdelacretaz,chrisg,pbwest,pietsch,jeremias,olegt,vmote|xml-fop,xml-site,xml-commons
>
> bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep xang
> avail|coar,dirkx,mode,stefano,twl,andyh,sboag,jtauber,andyc,rpfeiffe,mpogue,mdierken,kvisco,eduardop,abagchi,rahulj,rwebster,roddey,dleslie,mmidy,sanjiva,dmarston,pauldick,curcuru,dbertoni,jdonohue,robweir,balld,ricardo,zvia,gmarcy,arkin,duncan,aruna1,rajiv,lehors,jeffreyr,rubys,ben,hbed,duftler,jkesselm,auriemma,jacek,martinf,costin,garyp,johng,tmiller,amiro,morten,ovidiu,jambroziak,santiagopg,ilene,zongaro,mkwan|xml-site,xml-xalan,xml-stylebook,xml-xang,xml-admin,xml-commons
>
> From the result of this, one could possibly say FOP has less community
> then Xang, but we all knew the opposite is quite true.
If taken literally, my read of this is that they are essentially the
same community.
>> With respect to XML, I honestly don't know how many communities we
>> have. But the above provides a recipe to find out. Without changing
>> any physical layout of mailing lists or cvs repositories, we can begin
>> to phase out the karma and voting boundaries between various
>> subprojects. Those that don't wish to participate will be encouraged
>> to form their own separate projects (or move into incubation).
>
> I agree that breaking the barriers between subprojects, especially
> concerning voting (not so sure about karma), is an interesting
> Darwinistic and community exercise, but if we do so, we should do it
> based on some well-defined criteria.
Each community is welcome to define its own criteria.
> Concerning commit rights, I still believe that commit rights should be
> earned within the community that grows a certain subproject however.
OK, as long as separate community = separate project (in the ASF sense).
> That is, when a 'project' in your scenario would be something like
> cocoon.a.o, and a 'subproject' of that being Forrest.
If the cocoon and forrest share the same community, then this is fine
with me. Otherwise, this they should be peer projects.
>> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
>> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
>
> I would say 'make use of their rights or not' instead of 'opt in/out'.
OK.
>> What do others think?
>
> I'm still trying to understand what you are aiming at ;-)
Merge or diverge. Having community boundaries distinct from PMC
boundaries is not sustainable.
- Sam Ruby
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
[suggestion to hold this discussion only on general@xml.a.o from now?]
Sam Ruby wrote:
> > Separate code bases with separate communities should be separate
> > projects. Independent of the size of the codebase, if the size of
> > the community is only a few people, then it is not an ASF project.
> > Such efforts can be pursued outside of the ASF, be pursued inside the
> > Incubator, or be incorporated inside an existing community – as long
> > as all participants in that larger community are treated as peers.
Please define 'a few':
bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep fop
avail|coar,dirkx,stefano,twl,andyh,sboag,jtauber,andyc,rpfeiffe,mpogue,mdierken,kvisco,eduardop,abagchi,rahulj,rwebster,roddey,dleslie,mmidy,sanjiva,dmarston,pauldick,curcuru,dbertoni,jdonohue,robweir,balld,ricardo,zvia,gmarcy,arkin,duncan,aruna1,rajiv,fotis,eschaeffer,arved,gears,jordan,keiron,stanislav,klease,kellyc,artw,tore,bdelacretaz,chrisg,pbwest,pietsch,jeremias,olegt,vmote|xml-fop,xml-site,xml-commons
bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep xang
avail|coar,dirkx,mode,stefano,twl,andyh,sboag,jtauber,andyc,rpfeiffe,mpogue,mdierken,kvisco,eduardop,abagchi,rahulj,rwebster,roddey,dleslie,mmidy,sanjiva,dmarston,pauldick,curcuru,dbertoni,jdonohue,robweir,balld,ricardo,zvia,gmarcy,arkin,duncan,aruna1,rajiv,lehors,jeffreyr,rubys,ben,hbed,duftler,jkesselm,auriemma,jacek,martinf,costin,garyp,johng,tmiller,amiro,morten,ovidiu,jambroziak,santiagopg,ilene,zongaro,mkwan|xml-site,xml-xalan,xml-stylebook,xml-xang,xml-admin,xml-commons
From the result of this, one could possibly say FOP has less community
then Xang, but we all knew the opposite is quite true.
> With respect to XML, I honestly don't know how many communities we have.
> But the above provides a recipe to find out. Without changing any
> physical layout of mailing lists or cvs repositories, we can begin to
> phase out the karma and voting boundaries between various subprojects.
> Those that don't wish to participate will be encouraged to form their
> own separate projects (or move into incubation).
I agree that breaking the barriers between subprojects, especially
concerning voting (not so sure about karma), is an interesting
Darwinistic and community exercise, but if we do so, we should do it
based on some well-defined criteria.
Concerning commit rights, I still believe that commit rights should be
earned within the community that grows a certain subproject however.
That is, when a 'project' in your scenario would be something like
cocoon.a.o, and a 'subproject' of that being Forrest.
> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
I would say 'make use of their rights or not' instead of 'opt in/out'.
> What do others think?
I'm still trying to understand what you are aiming at ;-)
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://radio.weblogs.com/0103539/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
>
> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
>
> What do others think?
It continues to sound reasonable to me, but I'd personally like to see
the Jakarta "brand" continue. Not sure how to *do* that...
I don't think the same applies to XML. Note that I asked like the
tapestry guys "want to be top level" and it was "well no one will
find us there, we want Jakarta"... They're probably right quite
honestly. Half the people I know barely know there is an XML.apache.org...
-Andy
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@xml.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@xml.apache.org>
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Ryan Hoegg <rh...@isisnetworks.net>.
Hi, I didn't reply to the whole list of lists to which this was posted,
but I wanted to see if anyone in the XML-RPC project has a better angle
on this than I do.
What does this all mean in English? This seems to be the tail end of a
long thread from some other list. How is this going to affect the
XML-RPC project?
For example, I would be alarmed to see XML-RPC, Axis, and XML-Security
all get a mandate to become one project or leave Apache.
--
Ryan Hoegg
ISIS Networks
http://www.isisnetworks.net
Sam Ruby wrote:
> > Separate code bases with separate communities should be separate
> > projects. Independent of the size of the codebase, if the size of
> > the community is only a few people, then it is not an ASF project.
> > Such efforts can be pursued outside of the ASF, be pursued inside the
> > Incubator, or be incorporated inside an existing community – as long
> > as all participants in that larger community are treated as peers.
>
> With respect to XML, I honestly don't know how many communities we
> have. But the above provides a recipe to find out. Without changing
> any physical layout of mailing lists or cvs repositories, we can begin
> to phase out the karma and voting boundaries between various
> subprojects. Those that don't wish to participate will be encouraged
> to form their own separate projects (or move into incubation).
>
> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
>
> What do others think?
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
[suggestion to hold this discussion only on general@xml.a.o from now?]
Sam Ruby wrote:
> > Separate code bases with separate communities should be separate
> > projects. Independent of the size of the codebase, if the size of
> > the community is only a few people, then it is not an ASF project.
> > Such efforts can be pursued outside of the ASF, be pursued inside the
> > Incubator, or be incorporated inside an existing community – as long
> > as all participants in that larger community are treated as peers.
Please define 'a few':
bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep fop
avail|coar,dirkx,stefano,twl,andyh,sboag,jtauber,andyc,rpfeiffe,mpogue,mdierken,kvisco,eduardop,abagchi,rahulj,rwebster,roddey,dleslie,mmidy,sanjiva,dmarston,pauldick,curcuru,dbertoni,jdonohue,robweir,balld,ricardo,zvia,gmarcy,arkin,duncan,aruna1,rajiv,fotis,eschaeffer,arved,gears,jordan,keiron,stanislav,klease,kellyc,artw,tore,bdelacretaz,chrisg,pbwest,pietsch,jeremias,olegt,vmote|xml-fop,xml-site,xml-commons
bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep xang
avail|coar,dirkx,mode,stefano,twl,andyh,sboag,jtauber,andyc,rpfeiffe,mpogue,mdierken,kvisco,eduardop,abagchi,rahulj,rwebster,roddey,dleslie,mmidy,sanjiva,dmarston,pauldick,curcuru,dbertoni,jdonohue,robweir,balld,ricardo,zvia,gmarcy,arkin,duncan,aruna1,rajiv,lehors,jeffreyr,rubys,ben,hbed,duftler,jkesselm,auriemma,jacek,martinf,costin,garyp,johng,tmiller,amiro,morten,ovidiu,jambroziak,santiagopg,ilene,zongaro,mkwan|xml-site,xml-xalan,xml-stylebook,xml-xang,xml-admin,xml-commons
From the result of this, one could possibly say FOP has less community
then Xang, but we all knew the opposite is quite true.
> With respect to XML, I honestly don't know how many communities we have.
> But the above provides a recipe to find out. Without changing any
> physical layout of mailing lists or cvs repositories, we can begin to
> phase out the karma and voting boundaries between various subprojects.
> Those that don't wish to participate will be encouraged to form their
> own separate projects (or move into incubation).
I agree that breaking the barriers between subprojects, especially
concerning voting (not so sure about karma), is an interesting
Darwinistic and community exercise, but if we do so, we should do it
based on some well-defined criteria.
Concerning commit rights, I still believe that commit rights should be
earned within the community that grows a certain subproject however.
That is, when a 'project' in your scenario would be something like
cocoon.a.o, and a 'subproject' of that being Forrest.
> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
I would say 'make use of their rights or not' instead of 'opt in/out'.
> What do others think?
I'm still trying to understand what you are aiming at ;-)
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://radio.weblogs.com/0103539/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
>
> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
>
> What do others think?
It continues to sound reasonable to me, but I'd personally like to see
the Jakarta "brand" continue. Not sure how to *do* that...
I don't think the same applies to XML. Note that I asked like the
tapestry guys "want to be top level" and it was "well no one will
find us there, we want Jakarta"... They're probably right quite
honestly. Half the people I know barely know there is an XML.apache.org...
-Andy
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
>
>
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Costin Manolache <co...@covalent.net>.
On Mon, 2002-12-02 at 16:41, Sam Ruby wrote:
> > Separate code bases with separate communities should be separate
> > projects. Independent of the size of the codebase, if the size of
> > the community is only a few people, then it is not an ASF project.
> > Such efforts can be pursued outside of the ASF, be pursued inside the
> > Incubator, or be incorporated inside an existing community – as long
> > as all participants in that larger community are treated as peers.
>
> With respect to XML, I honestly don't know how many communities we have.
> But the above provides a recipe to find out. Without changing any
> physical layout of mailing lists or cvs repositories, we can begin to
> phase out the karma and voting boundaries between various subprojects.
> Those that don't wish to participate will be encouraged to form their
> own separate projects (or move into incubation).
>
> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
>
> What do others think?
( I changed the to: to include jakarta :-)
I think it is a good idea in general, as long as it is done gradually.
I personally think jakarta-commons commit model works fine ( even if
the one-mailing-list is not working as well :-). Even when it didn't
seem to work that well ( early days of xml-client for example ), it
actually did work as it was supposed to, and I think people learned
to keep track of what they need and use their vote.
Probably having the walls removed between projects that are close
( tomcat/jasper and taglibs or struts, etc ) would be a good start.
Costin
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
[suggestion to hold this discussion only on general@xml.a.o from now?]
Sam Ruby wrote:
> > Separate code bases with separate communities should be separate
> > projects. Independent of the size of the codebase, if the size of
> > the community is only a few people, then it is not an ASF project.
> > Such efforts can be pursued outside of the ASF, be pursued inside the
> > Incubator, or be incorporated inside an existing community – as long
> > as all participants in that larger community are treated as peers.
Please define 'a few':
bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep fop
avail|coar,dirkx,stefano,twl,andyh,sboag,jtauber,andyc,rpfeiffe,mpogue,mdierken,kvisco,eduardop,abagchi,rahulj,rwebster,roddey,dleslie,mmidy,sanjiva,dmarston,pauldick,curcuru,dbertoni,jdonohue,robweir,balld,ricardo,zvia,gmarcy,arkin,duncan,aruna1,rajiv,fotis,eschaeffer,arved,gears,jordan,keiron,stanislav,klease,kellyc,artw,tore,bdelacretaz,chrisg,pbwest,pietsch,jeremias,olegt,vmote|xml-fop,xml-site,xml-commons
bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep xang
avail|coar,dirkx,mode,stefano,twl,andyh,sboag,jtauber,andyc,rpfeiffe,mpogue,mdierken,kvisco,eduardop,abagchi,rahulj,rwebster,roddey,dleslie,mmidy,sanjiva,dmarston,pauldick,curcuru,dbertoni,jdonohue,robweir,balld,ricardo,zvia,gmarcy,arkin,duncan,aruna1,rajiv,lehors,jeffreyr,rubys,ben,hbed,duftler,jkesselm,auriemma,jacek,martinf,costin,garyp,johng,tmiller,amiro,morten,ovidiu,jambroziak,santiagopg,ilene,zongaro,mkwan|xml-site,xml-xalan,xml-stylebook,xml-xang,xml-admin,xml-commons
From the result of this, one could possibly say FOP has less community
then Xang, but we all knew the opposite is quite true.
> With respect to XML, I honestly don't know how many communities we have.
> But the above provides a recipe to find out. Without changing any
> physical layout of mailing lists or cvs repositories, we can begin to
> phase out the karma and voting boundaries between various subprojects.
> Those that don't wish to participate will be encouraged to form their
> own separate projects (or move into incubation).
I agree that breaking the barriers between subprojects, especially
concerning voting (not so sure about karma), is an interesting
Darwinistic and community exercise, but if we do so, we should do it
based on some well-defined criteria.
Concerning commit rights, I still believe that commit rights should be
earned within the community that grows a certain subproject however.
That is, when a 'project' in your scenario would be something like
cocoon.a.o, and a 'subproject' of that being Forrest.
> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
I would say 'make use of their rights or not' instead of 'opt in/out'.
> What do others think?
I'm still trying to understand what you are aiming at ;-)
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://radio.weblogs.com/0103539/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
[suggestion to hold this discussion only on general@xml.a.o from now?]
Sam Ruby wrote:
> > Separate code bases with separate communities should be separate
> > projects. Independent of the size of the codebase, if the size of
> > the community is only a few people, then it is not an ASF project.
> > Such efforts can be pursued outside of the ASF, be pursued inside the
> > Incubator, or be incorporated inside an existing community – as long
> > as all participants in that larger community are treated as peers.
Please define 'a few':
bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep fop
avail|coar,dirkx,stefano,twl,andyh,sboag,jtauber,andyc,rpfeiffe,mpogue,mdierken,kvisco,eduardop,abagchi,rahulj,rwebster,roddey,dleslie,mmidy,sanjiva,dmarston,pauldick,curcuru,dbertoni,jdonohue,robweir,balld,ricardo,zvia,gmarcy,arkin,duncan,aruna1,rajiv,fotis,eschaeffer,arved,gears,jordan,keiron,stanislav,klease,kellyc,artw,tore,bdelacretaz,chrisg,pbwest,pietsch,jeremias,olegt,vmote|xml-fop,xml-site,xml-commons
bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep xang
avail|coar,dirkx,mode,stefano,twl,andyh,sboag,jtauber,andyc,rpfeiffe,mpogue,mdierken,kvisco,eduardop,abagchi,rahulj,rwebster,roddey,dleslie,mmidy,sanjiva,dmarston,pauldick,curcuru,dbertoni,jdonohue,robweir,balld,ricardo,zvia,gmarcy,arkin,duncan,aruna1,rajiv,lehors,jeffreyr,rubys,ben,hbed,duftler,jkesselm,auriemma,jacek,martinf,costin,garyp,johng,tmiller,amiro,morten,ovidiu,jambroziak,santiagopg,ilene,zongaro,mkwan|xml-site,xml-xalan,xml-stylebook,xml-xang,xml-admin,xml-commons
From the result of this, one could possibly say FOP has less community
then Xang, but we all knew the opposite is quite true.
> With respect to XML, I honestly don't know how many communities we have.
> But the above provides a recipe to find out. Without changing any
> physical layout of mailing lists or cvs repositories, we can begin to
> phase out the karma and voting boundaries between various subprojects.
> Those that don't wish to participate will be encouraged to form their
> own separate projects (or move into incubation).
I agree that breaking the barriers between subprojects, especially
concerning voting (not so sure about karma), is an interesting
Darwinistic and community exercise, but if we do so, we should do it
based on some well-defined criteria.
Concerning commit rights, I still believe that commit rights should be
earned within the community that grows a certain subproject however.
That is, when a 'project' in your scenario would be something like
cocoon.a.o, and a 'subproject' of that being Forrest.
> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
I would say 'make use of their rights or not' instead of 'opt in/out'.
> What do others think?
I'm still trying to understand what you are aiming at ;-)
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://radio.weblogs.com/0103539/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
[suggestion to hold this discussion only on general@xml.a.o from now?]
Sam Ruby wrote:
> > Separate code bases with separate communities should be separate
> > projects. Independent of the size of the codebase, if the size of
> > the community is only a few people, then it is not an ASF project.
> > Such efforts can be pursued outside of the ASF, be pursued inside the
> > Incubator, or be incorporated inside an existing community – as long
> > as all participants in that larger community are treated as peers.
Please define 'a few':
bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep fop
avail|coar,dirkx,stefano,twl,andyh,sboag,jtauber,andyc,rpfeiffe,mpogue,mdierken,kvisco,eduardop,abagchi,rahulj,rwebster,roddey,dleslie,mmidy,sanjiva,dmarston,pauldick,curcuru,dbertoni,jdonohue,robweir,balld,ricardo,zvia,gmarcy,arkin,duncan,aruna1,rajiv,fotis,eschaeffer,arved,gears,jordan,keiron,stanislav,klease,kellyc,artw,tore,bdelacretaz,chrisg,pbwest,pietsch,jeremias,olegt,vmote|xml-fop,xml-site,xml-commons
bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep xang
avail|coar,dirkx,mode,stefano,twl,andyh,sboag,jtauber,andyc,rpfeiffe,mpogue,mdierken,kvisco,eduardop,abagchi,rahulj,rwebster,roddey,dleslie,mmidy,sanjiva,dmarston,pauldick,curcuru,dbertoni,jdonohue,robweir,balld,ricardo,zvia,gmarcy,arkin,duncan,aruna1,rajiv,lehors,jeffreyr,rubys,ben,hbed,duftler,jkesselm,auriemma,jacek,martinf,costin,garyp,johng,tmiller,amiro,morten,ovidiu,jambroziak,santiagopg,ilene,zongaro,mkwan|xml-site,xml-xalan,xml-stylebook,xml-xang,xml-admin,xml-commons
From the result of this, one could possibly say FOP has less community
then Xang, but we all knew the opposite is quite true.
> With respect to XML, I honestly don't know how many communities we have.
> But the above provides a recipe to find out. Without changing any
> physical layout of mailing lists or cvs repositories, we can begin to
> phase out the karma and voting boundaries between various subprojects.
> Those that don't wish to participate will be encouraged to form their
> own separate projects (or move into incubation).
I agree that breaking the barriers between subprojects, especially
concerning voting (not so sure about karma), is an interesting
Darwinistic and community exercise, but if we do so, we should do it
based on some well-defined criteria.
Concerning commit rights, I still believe that commit rights should be
earned within the community that grows a certain subproject however.
That is, when a 'project' in your scenario would be something like
cocoon.a.o, and a 'subproject' of that being Forrest.
> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
I would say 'make use of their rights or not' instead of 'opt in/out'.
> What do others think?
I'm still trying to understand what you are aiming at ;-)
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://radio.weblogs.com/0103539/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
>
> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
>
> What do others think?
It continues to sound reasonable to me, but I'd personally like to see
the Jakarta "brand" continue. Not sure how to *do* that...
I don't think the same applies to XML. Note that I asked like the
tapestry guys "want to be top level" and it was "well no one will
find us there, we want Jakarta"... They're probably right quite
honestly. Half the people I know barely know there is an XML.apache.org...
-Andy
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: xerces-p-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: xerces-p-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
[suggestion to hold this discussion only on general@xml.a.o from now?]
Sam Ruby wrote:
> > Separate code bases with separate communities should be separate
> > projects. Independent of the size of the codebase, if the size of
> > the community is only a few people, then it is not an ASF project.
> > Such efforts can be pursued outside of the ASF, be pursued inside the
> > Incubator, or be incorporated inside an existing community – as long
> > as all participants in that larger community are treated as peers.
Please define 'a few':
bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep fop
avail|coar,dirkx,stefano,twl,andyh,sboag,jtauber,andyc,rpfeiffe,mpogue,mdierken,kvisco,eduardop,abagchi,rahulj,rwebster,roddey,dleslie,mmidy,sanjiva,dmarston,pauldick,curcuru,dbertoni,jdonohue,robweir,balld,ricardo,zvia,gmarcy,arkin,duncan,aruna1,rajiv,fotis,eschaeffer,arved,gears,jordan,keiron,stanislav,klease,kellyc,artw,tore,bdelacretaz,chrisg,pbwest,pietsch,jeremias,olegt,vmote|xml-fop,xml-site,xml-commons
bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep xang
avail|coar,dirkx,mode,stefano,twl,andyh,sboag,jtauber,andyc,rpfeiffe,mpogue,mdierken,kvisco,eduardop,abagchi,rahulj,rwebster,roddey,dleslie,mmidy,sanjiva,dmarston,pauldick,curcuru,dbertoni,jdonohue,robweir,balld,ricardo,zvia,gmarcy,arkin,duncan,aruna1,rajiv,lehors,jeffreyr,rubys,ben,hbed,duftler,jkesselm,auriemma,jacek,martinf,costin,garyp,johng,tmiller,amiro,morten,ovidiu,jambroziak,santiagopg,ilene,zongaro,mkwan|xml-site,xml-xalan,xml-stylebook,xml-xang,xml-admin,xml-commons
From the result of this, one could possibly say FOP has less community
then Xang, but we all knew the opposite is quite true.
> With respect to XML, I honestly don't know how many communities we have.
> But the above provides a recipe to find out. Without changing any
> physical layout of mailing lists or cvs repositories, we can begin to
> phase out the karma and voting boundaries between various subprojects.
> Those that don't wish to participate will be encouraged to form their
> own separate projects (or move into incubation).
I agree that breaking the barriers between subprojects, especially
concerning voting (not so sure about karma), is an interesting
Darwinistic and community exercise, but if we do so, we should do it
based on some well-defined criteria.
Concerning commit rights, I still believe that commit rights should be
earned within the community that grows a certain subproject however.
That is, when a 'project' in your scenario would be something like
cocoon.a.o, and a 'subproject' of that being Forrest.
> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
I would say 'make use of their rights or not' instead of 'opt in/out'.
> What do others think?
I'm still trying to understand what you are aiming at ;-)
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://radio.weblogs.com/0103539/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@xml.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@xml.apache.org>
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
[suggestion to hold this discussion only on general@xml.a.o from now?]
Sam Ruby wrote:
> > Separate code bases with separate communities should be separate
> > projects. Independent of the size of the codebase, if the size of
> > the community is only a few people, then it is not an ASF project.
> > Such efforts can be pursued outside of the ASF, be pursued inside the
> > Incubator, or be incorporated inside an existing community – as long
> > as all participants in that larger community are treated as peers.
Please define 'a few':
bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep fop
avail|coar,dirkx,stefano,twl,andyh,sboag,jtauber,andyc,rpfeiffe,mpogue,mdierken,kvisco,eduardop,abagchi,rahulj,rwebster,roddey,dleslie,mmidy,sanjiva,dmarston,pauldick,curcuru,dbertoni,jdonohue,robweir,balld,ricardo,zvia,gmarcy,arkin,duncan,aruna1,rajiv,fotis,eschaeffer,arved,gears,jordan,keiron,stanislav,klease,kellyc,artw,tore,bdelacretaz,chrisg,pbwest,pietsch,jeremias,olegt,vmote|xml-fop,xml-site,xml-commons
bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep xang
avail|coar,dirkx,mode,stefano,twl,andyh,sboag,jtauber,andyc,rpfeiffe,mpogue,mdierken,kvisco,eduardop,abagchi,rahulj,rwebster,roddey,dleslie,mmidy,sanjiva,dmarston,pauldick,curcuru,dbertoni,jdonohue,robweir,balld,ricardo,zvia,gmarcy,arkin,duncan,aruna1,rajiv,lehors,jeffreyr,rubys,ben,hbed,duftler,jkesselm,auriemma,jacek,martinf,costin,garyp,johng,tmiller,amiro,morten,ovidiu,jambroziak,santiagopg,ilene,zongaro,mkwan|xml-site,xml-xalan,xml-stylebook,xml-xang,xml-admin,xml-commons
From the result of this, one could possibly say FOP has less community
then Xang, but we all knew the opposite is quite true.
> With respect to XML, I honestly don't know how many communities we have.
> But the above provides a recipe to find out. Without changing any
> physical layout of mailing lists or cvs repositories, we can begin to
> phase out the karma and voting boundaries between various subprojects.
> Those that don't wish to participate will be encouraged to form their
> own separate projects (or move into incubation).
I agree that breaking the barriers between subprojects, especially
concerning voting (not so sure about karma), is an interesting
Darwinistic and community exercise, but if we do so, we should do it
based on some well-defined criteria.
Concerning commit rights, I still believe that commit rights should be
earned within the community that grows a certain subproject however.
That is, when a 'project' in your scenario would be something like
cocoon.a.o, and a 'subproject' of that being Forrest.
> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
I would say 'make use of their rights or not' instead of 'opt in/out'.
> What do others think?
I'm still trying to understand what you are aiming at ;-)
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://radio.weblogs.com/0103539/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
[suggestion to hold this discussion only on general@xml.a.o from now?]
Sam Ruby wrote:
> > Separate code bases with separate communities should be separate
> > projects. Independent of the size of the codebase, if the size of
> > the community is only a few people, then it is not an ASF project.
> > Such efforts can be pursued outside of the ASF, be pursued inside the
> > Incubator, or be incorporated inside an existing community – as long
> > as all participants in that larger community are treated as peers.
Please define 'a few':
bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep fop
avail|coar,dirkx,stefano,twl,andyh,sboag,jtauber,andyc,rpfeiffe,mpogue,mdierken,kvisco,eduardop,abagchi,rahulj,rwebster,roddey,dleslie,mmidy,sanjiva,dmarston,pauldick,curcuru,dbertoni,jdonohue,robweir,balld,ricardo,zvia,gmarcy,arkin,duncan,aruna1,rajiv,fotis,eschaeffer,arved,gears,jordan,keiron,stanislav,klease,kellyc,artw,tore,bdelacretaz,chrisg,pbwest,pietsch,jeremias,olegt,vmote|xml-fop,xml-site,xml-commons
bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep xang
avail|coar,dirkx,mode,stefano,twl,andyh,sboag,jtauber,andyc,rpfeiffe,mpogue,mdierken,kvisco,eduardop,abagchi,rahulj,rwebster,roddey,dleslie,mmidy,sanjiva,dmarston,pauldick,curcuru,dbertoni,jdonohue,robweir,balld,ricardo,zvia,gmarcy,arkin,duncan,aruna1,rajiv,lehors,jeffreyr,rubys,ben,hbed,duftler,jkesselm,auriemma,jacek,martinf,costin,garyp,johng,tmiller,amiro,morten,ovidiu,jambroziak,santiagopg,ilene,zongaro,mkwan|xml-site,xml-xalan,xml-stylebook,xml-xang,xml-admin,xml-commons
From the result of this, one could possibly say FOP has less community
then Xang, but we all knew the opposite is quite true.
> With respect to XML, I honestly don't know how many communities we have.
> But the above provides a recipe to find out. Without changing any
> physical layout of mailing lists or cvs repositories, we can begin to
> phase out the karma and voting boundaries between various subprojects.
> Those that don't wish to participate will be encouraged to form their
> own separate projects (or move into incubation).
I agree that breaking the barriers between subprojects, especially
concerning voting (not so sure about karma), is an interesting
Darwinistic and community exercise, but if we do so, we should do it
based on some well-defined criteria.
Concerning commit rights, I still believe that commit rights should be
earned within the community that grows a certain subproject however.
That is, when a 'project' in your scenario would be something like
cocoon.a.o, and a 'subproject' of that being Forrest.
> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
I would say 'make use of their rights or not' instead of 'opt in/out'.
> What do others think?
I'm still trying to understand what you are aiming at ;-)
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://radio.weblogs.com/0103539/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: xerces-p-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: xerces-p-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
>
> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
>
> What do others think?
It continues to sound reasonable to me, but I'd personally like to see
the Jakarta "brand" continue. Not sure how to *do* that...
I don't think the same applies to XML. Note that I asked like the
tapestry guys "want to be top level" and it was "well no one will
find us there, we want Jakarta"... They're probably right quite
honestly. Half the people I know barely know there is an XML.apache.org...
-Andy
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
[suggestion to hold this discussion only on general@xml.a.o from now?]
Sam Ruby wrote:
> > Separate code bases with separate communities should be separate
> > projects. Independent of the size of the codebase, if the size of
> > the community is only a few people, then it is not an ASF project.
> > Such efforts can be pursued outside of the ASF, be pursued inside the
> > Incubator, or be incorporated inside an existing community – as long
> > as all participants in that larger community are treated as peers.
Please define 'a few':
bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep fop
avail|coar,dirkx,stefano,twl,andyh,sboag,jtauber,andyc,rpfeiffe,mpogue,mdierken,kvisco,eduardop,abagchi,rahulj,rwebster,roddey,dleslie,mmidy,sanjiva,dmarston,pauldick,curcuru,dbertoni,jdonohue,robweir,balld,ricardo,zvia,gmarcy,arkin,duncan,aruna1,rajiv,fotis,eschaeffer,arved,gears,jordan,keiron,stanislav,klease,kellyc,artw,tore,bdelacretaz,chrisg,pbwest,pietsch,jeremias,olegt,vmote|xml-fop,xml-site,xml-commons
bash-2.04$ cat /home/cvs/CVSROOT/avail | grep xang
avail|coar,dirkx,mode,stefano,twl,andyh,sboag,jtauber,andyc,rpfeiffe,mpogue,mdierken,kvisco,eduardop,abagchi,rahulj,rwebster,roddey,dleslie,mmidy,sanjiva,dmarston,pauldick,curcuru,dbertoni,jdonohue,robweir,balld,ricardo,zvia,gmarcy,arkin,duncan,aruna1,rajiv,lehors,jeffreyr,rubys,ben,hbed,duftler,jkesselm,auriemma,jacek,martinf,costin,garyp,johng,tmiller,amiro,morten,ovidiu,jambroziak,santiagopg,ilene,zongaro,mkwan|xml-site,xml-xalan,xml-stylebook,xml-xang,xml-admin,xml-commons
From the result of this, one could possibly say FOP has less community
then Xang, but we all knew the opposite is quite true.
> With respect to XML, I honestly don't know how many communities we have.
> But the above provides a recipe to find out. Without changing any
> physical layout of mailing lists or cvs repositories, we can begin to
> phase out the karma and voting boundaries between various subprojects.
> Those that don't wish to participate will be encouraged to form their
> own separate projects (or move into incubation).
I agree that breaking the barriers between subprojects, especially
concerning voting (not so sure about karma), is an interesting
Darwinistic and community exercise, but if we do so, we should do it
based on some well-defined criteria.
Concerning commit rights, I still believe that commit rights should be
earned within the community that grows a certain subproject however.
That is, when a 'project' in your scenario would be something like
cocoon.a.o, and a 'subproject' of that being Forrest.
> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
I would say 'make use of their rights or not' instead of 'opt in/out'.
> What do others think?
I'm still trying to understand what you are aiming at ;-)
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at http://radio.weblogs.com/0103539/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
>
> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
>
> What do others think?
It continues to sound reasonable to me, but I'd personally like to see
the Jakarta "brand" continue. Not sure how to *do* that...
I don't think the same applies to XML. Note that I asked like the
tapestry guys "want to be top level" and it was "well no one will
find us there, we want Jakarta"... They're probably right quite
honestly. Half the people I know barely know there is an XML.apache.org...
-Andy
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
>
>
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
>
> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
>
> What do others think?
It continues to sound reasonable to me, but I'd personally like to see
the Jakarta "brand" continue. Not sure how to *do* that...
I don't think the same applies to XML. Note that I asked like the
tapestry guys "want to be top level" and it was "well no one will
find us there, we want Jakarta"... They're probably right quite
honestly. Half the people I know barely know there is an XML.apache.org...
-Andy
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
>
>
Re: The organization of xml.apache.org
Posted by "Andrew C. Oliver" <ac...@apache.org>.
>
> What I like most about such a proposal is that it is completely up to
> the commiters to decide whether they want opt in or opt out.
>
> What do others think?
It continues to sound reasonable to me, but I'd personally like to see
the Jakarta "brand" continue. Not sure how to *do* that...
I don't think the same applies to XML. Note that I asked like the
tapestry guys "want to be top level" and it was "well no one will
find us there, we want Jakarta"... They're probably right quite
honestly. Half the people I know barely know there is an XML.apache.org...
-Andy
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
>
>